Susan Murray MP: speeches

Speeches

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this debate. Local businesses are the heart and soul of our communities. The independent café, the family butcher and the local hardware shop create jobs, pay taxes and invest in our communities. They are the reason people feel proud of where they come from.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend on business rates. I have heard repeatedly from businesses in Mid Dunbartonshire that they are unable to afford to hire young people and give them their first experience of work, or that they have had to cut their hours due to rising costs. At the same time that they are being hit by rising costs and static VAT thresholds, they are competing with online giants that pay a fraction of the tax they pay. Amazon’s five main UK companies paid just 7.1% corporation tax last year, while our main high street businesses are expected to pay 25%. The Government have the ability to put us on a different path by cutting VAT for hospitality and attractions. Our cafés and restaurants are the beating heart of the high street. They bring footfall, they create atmosphere, they give people a reason to go to town centres, and they create community. A great example of this is the Bookmonger at Bearsden Cross, which celebrates its first birthday on 11 July. Aside from transforming the Cross with a new, fresh business idea, Caitlyn, who owns the business, is a cancer survivor who raises a lot of money for the Beatson cancer centre in Glasgow, and I hope that this business can also survive. The Government should close loopholes that allow online giants to pay a fraction of the tax that our high street traders pay in full. We cannot ask local businesses to compete with not only the economies of scale that those conglomerates bring, but a tax system rigged to punish those who play by the rules. The sad truth is that the soul of our town centres is being slowly eroded: businesses are taxed into administration, their customers have moved online and our favourite shops are slowly replaced by the neon signs of vape shops and barbers. The Government have a choice to back our local businesses.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that we need more powers to make sure that the playing field is fair for local businesses in our town centres. Finally, I ask the Government not to continue loading costs on businesses that hold our town centres together. I ask them to review business rates, cut VAT for hospitality, level the playing field on corporation tax and back the businesses that make us proud of where we come from.

• 24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for securing this debate. The House of Commons Library has called the 2024 general election the least proportional election in British history. Labour won 411 seats out of 650—almost two thirds of the Commons—on a third of the vote. The problem is not that a party can win power; the problem is that first past the post inflates that power beyond what the public voted for. A system that turns one third of the votes into two thirds of the power and a massive majority is not representing the public’s choice; it is warping it. As we have all seen, it allows wildly unpopular policies to be forced through with little pushback. I may not agree with Reform, but they came third on vote share with around 14% and won just five seats. The Greens won roughly 7% and returned only four seats. The truth is that my own party, the Liberal Democrats, took 72 seats on around 12% of the vote. The system rewarded us where our support was concentrated. That means that under first past the post, where you live decides whether or not your vote counts. We have all been told that this gives us a strong and stable Government. Clearly, that is not true. A system that hands enormous power to one party on a minority of the vote does not produce consistency; it produces lurches. One Government builds solutions; the next tears them down and creates their own. I represent the Scottish seat of Mid Dunbartonshire. Scotland shows both how far reform can take us and why it must go further. The Scottish Parliament has used a form of proportional representation since its creation in 1999. Of its 129 Members, 73 are elected to represent 73 constituencies and 56 from regional lists using the D’Hondt system. That is a complicated system of proportional representation that very few voters fully understand. Last month at the Scottish elections, the SNP won 58 seats and was the party with the highest number of seats. Following a deal with the Scottish Green party, which had 15 seats, the Scottish Government are calling for the UK Government to agree to a second independence referendum. However, taken together, pro-independence parties now hold 73 of the 129 seats on around 43% of the vote.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Legacy of Jo Cox · Hansard source

  More

  My goodness, how do you follow that? I thank our friend the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) for that wonderful tribute to her sister. I am grateful to speak in this debate and to have the opportunity to honour the work and legacy of Jo Cox. Jo served in the House before my time here began, but I want to speak in the debate because of the way she approached politics, always understanding that we have more in common than divides us. In preparing for the debate, I looked not just at how Jo is remembered but the work she did. What stands out is a woman who did politics that was practical, human and rooted in the lives of people who too often went unheard. In her work on Syria, when she pressed the House to look clearly at the reality facing civilians and to recognise that sympathy was not enough, she said: “It is now time for us to listen and to act.” —[ Official Report , 12 October 2015; Vol. 600, c. 140.] That, for me, is the heart of Jo’s legacy: not just compassion, but compassion turned into action. That is the message we need to reflect on today. Too often, we see how easy it is to create anger or mistrust—to develop rhetoric to tear things down. We see that today in those stoking racial hatred and religious division. It is much harder to make real positive change, but that is exactly what Jo did. The Jo Cox Foundation has carried that work on, and the Great Get Together is a fantastic example of that. It is not complicated and it does not ask people to agree on everything; it simply asks people to come together to share food, to talk, to meet neighbours and to remember that community works in all its diversity. We see that in our own constituencies, too. I invite Members to Sked’s Garden on 21 June, where we are having a massive barefoot ceilidh as a free event, which everyone is invited to. In Mid Dunbartonshire I see other groups, such as the Men’s Shed, Apna Ghar, the Hive, GRACE—Group Recovery Aftercare Community Enterprise—and Gavin’s Mill, everything from heritage groups to community development trusts, offering people a safe and welcoming place to rebuild lives, reduce social isolation and promote wellbeing at home and internationally. My own life took an unexpected turn when I became a full-time carer, and I experienced how important the support of community is. Jo understood that loneliness is not a side issue; it is something that can quietly shrink a person’s life. It affects old people, younger people, carers, bereaved families, and many people who would never say out loud that they are lonely. Her work helped Parliament to take that seriously, and we should keep taking it seriously. We all have lessons to learn from Jo’s example. We can disagree strongly, and at times maybe we should, but we cannot treat each other as enemies because of our differing views. We must look for common ground to build solutions on. The best tribute we can pay is not just to remember her, but to continue the work she left for us: to encourage more women to choose to enter politics, to choose to listen, act and build community, and to choose to make our politics a little braver and a little kinder.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I want to continue to highlight the importance of local railways—an issue that has already been raised by the hon. Member for Bathgate and Linlithgow (Kirsteen Sullivan). This year is the 200th anniversary of Scotland’s first modern railway, the Monkland and Kirkintilloch line. It opened in 1826, just months after Stockton and Darlington became the first passenger railway in the world to use steam trains, and it is the first railway in Scotland to be authorised by Act of Parliament to use steam trains for both passengers and goods. The community in my constituency is celebrating with exhibitions, talks and a guided walk in Whitegates Park, which is named after the level crossing where the line approached the Forth and Clyde canal, delivering Monkland coal to barges destined for Edinburgh. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Don Martin, an eminent local historian who has researched and championed the heritage of the line for decades, and will he consider coming north—

• 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The development of the nuclear site at Wylfa in Wales is set to bring thousands of jobs and revitalise the local community. A similar site near my constituency would play an enormous role in the shift away from oil and gas towards energy independence and bringing costs down. Will the Leader of the House ask the Minister for Energy to meet me to discuss Great British Energy Nuclear’s assessment of Scotland’s nuclear opportunity?

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree: the vision is there, but we take too long to make decisions. When that happens, our workforce make their own decisions, and businesses do not come that might have considered coming. We have to support the opportunity that is available to us. We must look seriously at how we encourage companies to build the components of the green revolution here. We have the skills and a history of great steelworks and dockyards. Those can be revitalised, and our communities alongside them. However, building at home extends further than just good practice: it reduces risk to supply and security. The National Cyber Security Centre publishes dedicated supply chain security principles to help organisations manage supply chain risk. That is the mindset we need for critical national infrastructure, and we have seen why it matters. UK authorities have been looking into reported cyber-security concerns linked to remote-access features in some electric buses imported from China—the same place that much of our green technology comes from. This is not about sensationalising or point scoring: if supplier risks matter for buses, they certainly matter for the systems that keep the lights on and our countries running. Will the Minister use the industrial strategy to set out clear UK content and supply chain commitments, to ensure that demand for grid and energy production components is not only met in a timely manner but protected from foreign interference? I finish by returning to the household reality, because net zero will not be delivered by megawatts alone; it will be delivered in homes and communities, and it must be made simple, safe and scalable. The Climate Change Committee’s progress report found a 56% increase in heat pump installations in 2024, driven by increased support from Government schemes, but it is clear that scaling remains the challenge. Households respond to a simple proposition: reliable installers, clear standards, stable support and aftercare. That too should be treated as part of the mission to build a UK production base. A national retrofit and heat pump supply chain would create skilled work in every community. Will Ministers treat heat pumps and retrofits as part of the same mission, supporting an installer pipeline, quality assurance, consumer protection and an end-to-end journey from advice, to finance, to installation, to aftercare? Scotland is delivering Britain’s energy security and clean power. Now the Government must deliver for Scotland, with fairness, jobs and infrastructure that turn Scotland’s contribution into lower bills and better energy security for everyone.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. Although I am focusing on Scotland, it is Scotland as part of the UK and not Scotland alone. We want to make sure that we do not lose the skilled labour that is vital to a successful transition, because we would then have to pay more later to import the labour and expertise that we should have retained to do the work. I want to be clear about a point that is often overlooked or used by those with a vested interest against renewables: the UK will need oil and gas for the foreseeable future, even as we decarbonise. In that context, and to secure our own energy security, we should meet as much of the demand for hydrocarbons as possible from a secure, well-regulated domestic supply, rather than simply importing more and losing or exporting jobs. Importing more does not stop consumption; it simply shifts production elsewhere, often to jurisdictions with lower standards and higher geopolitical risk. Domestic supply, properly regulated, can be the safer bridge while we build out our new low-carbon system at scale and ensure security of supply. Will Ministers pull together existing work into a single transition pathway that links North sea decisions to a workforce plan, covering skills mapping, retraining and support where needed? If we want a managed transition, we also have to be honest about the urgency of the whole-system needs of a clean grid. A net zero system is essential—Scotland shows that it is possible, and it should be the goal—but a renewables-heavy system needs predictable, low-carbon power alongside renewables, storage and interconnection. That is why I support nuclear, and why small modular reactors should be part of the plan to achieve net zero in Scotland. The SNP Government’s position is that they do not support building new nuclear power plants in Scotland under current technologies. Meanwhile, the UK Government have confirmed Wylfa in Wales as the site for the UK’s first small modular reactor. The risk is obvious that Scotland will end up hosting more of the infrastructure footprint of the transition but without the benefits, while other parts of the UK will capture more of the firm power investment and the supply chain jobs. In Scotland, the devolution framework really matters. Nuclear market frameworks and regulations are reserved, while planning and community impacts, along with local skills delivery and many aspects of economic development, are devolved. This cannot work without co-ordination. Will Ministers request UK-Scottish Government talks on Scotland’s nuclear policy, with SMRs explicitly on the agenda, to highlight the positive economic benefit for Scotland, and to push for equal access to jobs and development across the UK? Scotland hosts major clean power generation and transmission infrastructure, but fairness must follow that footprint.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. We have a real opportunity with Great British Energy, in the current environment, to take advantage of what the commercial companies are offering with regard to reducing costs for individual homeowners and to use digital technology to ensure that community energy generated into the grid benefits the communities that host the infrastructure that generates that energy. Communities see the turbines, substations and pylons; as the grid expands, they see that infrastructure expand, too. They live with disruption during construction and operation, and too often they do not see fair value for the disruption that they face. That means that there is an opportunity here. The Government have already been developing the policy infrastructure. DESNZ published a working paper seeking views on the design of a potential mandatory community benefit scheme and the facilitation of shared ownership for low-carbon energy infrastructure. That is not a small thing; it is a recognition that we cannot build at the pace required without public consent, and public consent is strengthened when communities are well-informed and share in the long-term value.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, which I absolutely agree with. As I have just said, this is something that needs to be looked at, and there is an opportunity to make sure that communities all across the UK benefit from the power generation that they have to live with locally every day. Will Ministers commit to introducing a consistent community benefit and community energy framework for major low-carbon infrastructure, so that host communities—especially in rural and off-gas-grid areas—share in any long-term benefits? Beyond the initial generation of power, we forget about the grid. None of our ambitions on net zero or energy security will be met if we cannot move the power that we generate around the UK. We must fix the grid; we must stop paying to waste clean energy. We have built the infrastructure to generate power faster than we have built the network to connect and transport it. The result is that bill payers are burdened with the cost of electricity that they cannot use and that cannot be brought to them. The National Energy System Operator’s annual balancing costs report sets out the scale of the problem. It reports that grid constraint costs increased by 64% in 2024-25, totalling £1.7 billion. The total energy lost to that failure was 13.5 TWh, which is nearly as much as Scotland sent to England. This is not a theoretical cost; it is money that households and businesses pay because the network cannot always carry the clean power that is available. Will Ministers pledge to accelerate grid development and to drive connections reform at pace and with clear milestones, so that we stop paying for unused electricity and improve resilience, particularly for rural and remote communities? The grid is not just an infrastructure issue; it is an opportunity to redevelop our industrial heartlands. If Scotland is powering the transition, Scotland should also help to build it. Scotland has a proven history in heavy engineering and industrial delivery, with ports, fabrication, and a supply chain shaped by decades of offshore work. The transition should not become a story of “import the kit, export the jobs”.

• 25 Feb 2026 · Relations with Scottish Government · Hansard source

  More

  Transport in Scotland is devolved, but Labour’s new electric vehicle tax is not. Scotland is home to the largest constituencies by area in the UK. This will mean that many rural Scots, who already pay more for electricity at home, will pay more tax despite having less access to charging infrastructure. Can the Secretary of State say what discussions have been had with the Scottish Government on the impact of this tax and whether the Government will work with the Scottish Government to improve charging access and create a mandatory community benefit scheme for those who see the turbines of the green revolution from their windows, but not a fair reflection in their bills?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It seems that with increasing frequency I stand in this place welcoming Labour U-turns, and today I welcome yet another. The decision to lift the two-child cap is clearly the right moral choice, and it will lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. For those in Scotland, this is a particularly welcome change. There will no longer be any need for the Scottish Government to divert funds from social care and council services to the Scottish child payment. With that in mind, I urge the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman), who is on the Bench behind me, to discuss with her colleagues in Holyrood the merits of using some of the projected £155 million savings to help fund a new health and care hub for the people of Bearsden and Milngavie in my constituency. I am aware that some people do not support lifting the cap. The change is set to cost UK taxpayers over £3 billion annually by 2030—clearly an enormous sum. Over the past year, we have seen that this Labour Government are set on making working people pay for their changes through tax band freezing, national insurance rises and pension changes. With that in mind, I urge the Government to look seriously at the Liberal Democrat proposals that aim to raise tax revenue. First, banks have made record profits—an estimated £50 billion in a single year—off the backs of hard-working people. We Liberal Democrats believe that it is only fair that the banks pay back some of that money. A windfall tax on these enormous profits could raise £7 billion per year, without placing any more strain on people who are already struggling. On top of that—I know that Conservative Members will not be happy to hear this again—we need a customs union with Europe. Trade deals with China and India are not unwelcome, but the biggest opportunity is right on our doorstep: an extra £90 billion a year in tax revenue that does not require going cap in hand to those who stand against our values or who facilitate our enemies. Lifting children out of poverty does not have to put a further strain on working people. We can create a fair tax system in which companies pay their fair share to help those from whom they profit.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Holocaust Memorial Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Since the horrific attacks of 7 October 2023, we have seen a sharp and sustained increase in antisemitic abuse in Britain. Last year, a report commissioned by the Board of Deputies of British Jews found widespread failures to address anti-Jewish discrimination across public life, including in the NHS, education, the arts and policing. This matters today and is not a problem of the past. The Community Security Trust recorded over 3,500 antisemitic incidents in the UK in 2024—one of the highest totals on record. I understand that some will try to tie what is happening here in the UK to Israel’s actions in Gaza. People may hold strong views about that conflict, but we must be absolutely clear: British Jews are not responsible for the actions of any Government overseas. They are simply trying to live their lives, regardless of their faith or community identity. They should never be blamed, targeted or held accountable for events beyond their control. That is why remembrance must go hand in hand with education. Holocaust survivors are fewer each year, as we have heard, and we cannot rely on living testimony alone. We need strong, honest education about the Holocaust, about antisemitism, and about how quickly lies and conspiracy theories can spread, especially online. The truth is that hatred is often fuelled by misinformation and a lack of understanding. Today conspiracy theories travel faster than ever, amplified by social media and algorithms that drive people towards ever more extreme content. Given the ease with which hate can spread online, a memorial linked to a learning centre—one that helps people to understand the Holocaust and confront antisemitism—has real value. As we approach Holocaust Memorial Day, I hope the House can send a clear message: we remember, we educate, and we will stand against antisemitism and prejudice, in all its forms, wherever it is found.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  First, I welcome the £820 million increase in funding for Scotland, the largest real-terms settlement Scotland has received. I have no doubt that my constituents will be pleased to hear of the increase, and I can only hope that they will benefit from it. Today’s theme is investment, and I would like to address the SNP’s lacklustre investment in our health infrastructure. To be clear, I want to ensure that the money sent to Scotland for devolved matters is not frittered away by SNP Scottish Government mismanagement. The residents of my constituency have been crying out for a healthcare centre for years. I have written to the Scottish Government on numerous occasions, pressing both the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for action. The response is always the same: either a resounding no or silence. The people of Mid Dunbartonshire deserve better. Nearby in East Renfrewshire, they have received the very same type of health and care centre we have been crying out for, showing what is possible in constituencies like mine when the SNP provides adequate funding. By investing in local health and care, we could make serious long-term savings for the NHS, preventing costly long-term conditions and avoidable hospital admissions through early intervention. That would give the community access to the care, health and wellbeing it needs close to home, reducing the need for often frail or elderly constituents to make the difficult journey to Glasgow. I urge the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to join me in writing to the Scottish Government to request that the residents of Mid Dunbartonshire get the health and care hub they deserve.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Carbon Budget Delivery Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I will do my best. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I thank the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) for securing the debate and bringing attention to this matter. Although some may deny its impact or severity, climate change represents the greatest modern threat to our planet. The data is clear. If we continue down our current path, millions of lives will be lost and our way of life will be changed forever. We have an opportunity to show the world that there is an alternative path to save lives and avoid catastrophe. Steps have been taken to create a Britain at the forefront of climate action, but there are still gaping holes. Although we have enormous capacity for green energy production through wind, tidal and solar, we do not yet take full advantage of it. My constituents in Mid Dunbartonshire demand that we act faster. We must take the opportunity to produce wind turbines domestically; less than half of the wind turbines operating in the UK contain any British component. Instead, we ship turbines in from countries such as China, undermining their green credentials and costing British jobs. We are not moving fast enough to upgrade our grid, meaning that we are restricting the energy output at some sites for as much as 71% of the time. At the same time, we seem to be ignoring the potential of community energy and local projects to take pressure off the wider grid and to provide cheaper bills to British people. It is clear that although we have incredible potential, we need to move faster to exploit it. The Government must place decarbonisation at the heart of the UK’s industrial strategy. The net zero sector is growing three times faster than the overall UK economy and jobs in the sector pay almost 15% more than the national average. If we want good, long-term jobs for British people, we must look seriously at green energy. We can create manufacturing jobs producing the technology, jobs working on the grid, jobs working on offshore sites and many more, but only if we take climate change seriously. That means ensuring that workers and communities in sectors such as North sea oil and gas are not left behind as the industry declines, but supported to move into new, clean industries. Even if all our energy came from renewables we would need oil and gas for the foreseeable future, but it makes no sense to import gas, which is four times as polluting as local production. The Liberal Democrats would introduce a carbon tariff to level the playing field and minimise carbon emissions. The skills already built up in Scotland’s energy sector are the skills that we need for offshore wind, grid upgrades and new green technologies, but there is an urgent need to invest in more skill training and housing if we want the sector to thrive, grow and build new sustainable jobs and communities. The Government have listened to the Liberal Democrats before on green energy. I urge them to do so again to help create a cleaner, fairer future for our children, and across the world.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Devolution in Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) for bringing attention to the matter. As my colleagues have made clear, the Liberal Democrats believe in devolution. Our votes pushed it over the line in 1999, delivering a Scottish Parliament and taking decision making closer to the people. We remain proud of that achievement, and we want that devolution to extend to councils and to communities, yet the sad reality is that the opportunities presented to Scotland by devolution have been squandered. Years of financial mismanagement, failed education reforms and endless NHS recovery plans have let Scots down. After nearly two decades in office, the SNP have proved every bit as adept at failing the people of Scotland as they have accused the Conservatives of being. We have watched the SNP divert half a billion pounds from green energy initiatives simply to plug budget gaps; through mismanagement, we have seen the squandering of another half a billion on ferries that were originally promised for less than £100 million; and worryingly, we have seen the party’s own finances called into question. Conservative curtains and cupboards are clearly a no-go, but the SNP motorhomes are all right. Despite those failures and the clear rejection of independence, the SNP continues to demand referenda. In 2014, the “time was right” and the people of Scotland said no. In 2016, the “time was right” again and the courts rejected it. In 2025, it repeats the same mantra. A vote once described as once in a generation has become once in a Parliament. Instead of working for the Scottish people, it flogs the same tired cause. The Liberal Democrats offer a different vision: a fair deal for Scotland within a strong federal United Kingdom. We want decisions taken as close to local communities as possible, empowering them to shape their future, but co-operation at the federal level is vital to tackle the challenges we face as a nation. This is why the Liberal Democrats want a joint council of the nations to drive innovation and co-ordinated action to tackle the climate emergency. We want to secure agreement through the common frameworks and a fair dispute resolution process so that differences between Administrations are resolved maturely, not through endless political games. We want stronger joint ministerial work on issues such as the industrial strategy to ensure that every nation’s voice is heard in shaping our economy. That kind of co-operation delivers results. We should draw on the strengths of all four nations, not tear them apart and play politics with people’s futures. Scotland deserves better than the uncertainty it has experienced. It deserves co-operation, certainty and a Government who listen. I look forward to the Scottish elections next year, with more Liberal Democrat MSPs entering the Scottish Parliament to work hard in the interests of Scottish people of all ages.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Religious Crematoriums · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the provision of religious crematoria. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I am grateful to have secured this important debate on the provision of religious crematoriums and the access issues faced by faith communities across our country. At its heart, this debate is about dignity, respect and equality. How we support families at the end of life is a test of our society’s values. Every person, regardless of faith or background, deserves the opportunity to say farewell to their loved ones in a manner that honours traditions and beliefs. For many, cremation or burial may seem a straightforward matter, an administrative process supported by local authorities and funeral providers. Yet for a significant section of our population, and particularly those from minority faiths, the reality is far more complex. Limited provision, a lack of awareness, and regulatory barriers too often mean that families are left distressed and unsupported at the moment when they most need compassion. I want to begin with the provision of crematoriums. There are more than 300 crematoriums across the United Kingdom, but the vast majority operate on a standardised model that does not reflect the full diversity of religious practice. For many communities, including Hindu and Buddhist communities, religious tradition often requires that cremation be accompanied by specific rites—including chanting, prayers and periods of meditation before the cremation itself—yet many crematoriums impose strict time limits, restrict the length of services or fail to provide space for those rituals to take place with the dignity they deserve. Families are therefore required to adapt their practices, often in ways that feel at odds with centuries of teaching. That adaptation is accepted by some. For others, it leaves a sense that their most sacred rituals are being denied. This is not a question of faith; it is about fairness and equality. We must not have a situation in which some families can conduct funerals according to their beliefs with ease, while others must travel hundreds of miles, negotiate with reluctant providers or compromise on their most cherished traditions. That inequality is compounded by financial barriers. In many parts of the UK, families seeking more accommodating crematoriums find themselves reliant on private providers. The cost of travelling, combined with higher fees, makes it impossible for many to access the services they need. For some, this results in long delays or fragmented ceremonies, which add to the distress of bereavement. Local authorities are, of course, under immense financial pressure, but the Equality Act 2010 places clear duties on public bodies. They must have due regard to the needs of religious communities under the public sector equality duty. Inadequate provision risks indirect discrimination against minority faiths, undermining the principle of equal treatment before the law. There are some examples of progress. At Great Glen crematorium in Leicestershire, a dedicated Hindu shrine has been installed to support ritual practice. Leicester city council’s burial space strategy recognises the growing demand from Hindu, Sikh, Jain and Buddhist communities for more suitable provision. Alongside cremation, I want to address burial. For Muslim families and Jewish families, religious teaching requires that a body be buried as soon as possible—within 24 hours of death. That is not a matter of preference; it is a religious obligation. Reading borough council took the local Muslim community’s needs into account when updating its cemetery regulations, but the truth is that good practice remains the exception, not the rule.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Religious Crematoriums · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with that principle, but our systems are not always designed with it in mind. Delays in death certification, the coronial process and registration services frequently mean that families are unable to bury their loved ones within the required timescale. Some local authorities have taken steps to improve responsiveness by offering out-of-hours registration services. Those efforts show that, with the right planning and partnership, it is possible to respect religious obligations around timely burial, but provision remains patchy across the country and too often families are left facing painful delays at a time of grief. In 21st-century Britain, it is not unreasonable to ask that every family should be confident that their loved one can be buried according to their faith. I understand that it is important to recognise the devolved aspect of this matter. In Scotland, the Burial and Cremation (Scotland) Act 2016 provides a modern legislative framework with greater recognition of religious needs. In Wales and Northern Ireland, responsibility also lies with the devolved Administrations, but in England the responsibility rests with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. At UK level, Parliament remains responsible for equalities law and for setting the broader standards of fairness and human rights that underpin our system. That means the Government cannot simply say that crematoriums are a local issue. There is a role for national leadership. All communities across the UK are entitled to expect that their needs will not be ignored because they are in a local minority. Minimum standards, guidance and funding support are all tools available to the Government to ensure fairness across the country. Constituents and communities have raised this issue for many years. Hindu and Sikh organisations have petitioned successive Governments to highlight the lack of appropriate crematoriums. Muslim representatives have repeatedly drawn attention to the difficulties caused by delays in burial, which has also been highlighted by Jewish representatives. Behind every one of those campaigns is a grieving family—real people facing unnecessary distress because our systems are not flexible enough to accommodate their faith. The basic concept is simple: public services must reflect the diversity of the people they serve. That is not a question of favouring one group over another, but of recognising that equality sometimes requires accommodation. A one-size-fits-all approach, designed for the majority, inevitably excludes minorities, and that is not good enough in modern Britain. I therefore ask the Minister to commit to three steps. The first is to review the provision of religiously appropriate crematoriums across Britain, to identify gaps and to work with local authorities to close them. The second is to work with the relevant authorities to ensure that coroner and registration services are able to respond to the urgent burial needs of certain faiths with clear national guidance. The third step is to ensure that the equality duty is properly considered in all planning and funding decisions relating to crematoriums and burial services, so that minority communities are not excluded. How we treat people at the end of life reflects who we are as a society. A society that truly respects diversity and equality is one that values every community, however small, and ensures that they can say farewell to their loved ones in accordance with their beliefs. Families in grief should not face barriers, compromises or indignities. They should find public services that meet them with understanding, respect and compassion.